Re: [PATCH 00/12] ASoC: Intel: avs: Add support for MTL-FCL platforms

[Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@intel.com>]

On 2025-04-07 11:36 AM, Girdwood, Liam R wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-04-07 at 10:04 +0200, Cezary Rojewski wrote:

>>>> FCL is a PTL-A, PTL-based platform. The driver is officially
>>>> supported
>>>> on the ACE architecture with clients utilizing it on
>>>> distributions
>>>> such
>>>> as Android and Yocto. As software needs little to no changes to
>>>> cover
>>>> PTL alone it is preferable to have clear division: ace1.0 <-
>>>> ace2.0
>>>> <-
>>>> ace3.0. The code is maintainable and readable this way.
>>>
>>> No argument with FCL or any non client devices.
>>
>> I see. So we're talking about pci_ids and their attached descriptors,
>> and _not_ removing the functional code that enables avs-driver on ACE
>> architecture?
> 
> Yes, lets not cause any confusion with duplicated IDs or product names
> across different drivers. Not removing any AVS code :)


Ack.

>>
>> The filenames/prefixes shall remain as-is given the driver's design -
>> platform that starts given arch, becomes its namesake.
>>
> 
> No issue if you want to rename any IP code filename to e.g. ACE2
> instead of LNL as this makes it obvious for anyone reading the code and
> you can add my  Ack to that if wanted.

I opted out of cavs15, cavs25, avs10 (just few examples but I bet the 
idea is visible) long time ago due to Pierre's feedback. Suggestion was: 
it is easier for the non-Intel people to understand the "architecture" 
concept for Intel AudioDSP if it's tied to platform name. As all the 
files within the avs/ folder follow that scheme now, I'm not keen going 
against that pattern now.

I can 3 commits adding mtl.c, lnl.c and ptl.c into a single commit, drop 
the pci_ids and their contexts so it aligns with your comment about 
leaving out the confusion. Does that suffice?

Kind regards,
Czarek